What is Style? Part 2

At the beginning of the semester we were asked the same question and I responded by comparing writing style to a dress style. A comparison that was shot down at the next class meeting...
Well, after the last three torturous months, I changed my mind.
Style, to me, is the way in which you use the words to express your message. For instance, at the beginning of the semester we explored how writing is a technology and the change from oral to literate cultures. Before writing, oral was a style. It was the way they expressed their message. The style changed with the shift to literate cultures. Then, rules were made to set a standard for this technology called writing. Hence, the style manuals we read. The new style was writing.
The transition continues... we moved onto comics and the idea of combining pictures with writing to express the message. Thus, another style. More specifically, we studied the style of comics. As we coasted along this sea of pictures and words, we of course came to movies. A moving picture, if you will. Another style. This style used words the least, other than the oral cultures of course, and it was interesting to note the changes of writing and expression throughout the course and the different styles that were created due to these transitions.
So all in all, I think that style is the way in which you express your message or "words". It is not a a style of writing like fiction or comedy, but the way in which you give the message to your audience.

Peer Review Final Post

All in all I would have to say that the most useful part of peer review is the chance for someone else to read your essay and see if they understand the point you are trying to get across. If I don't really understand what someone is saying, I will let them know. Also, if I get the point htey are trying to make, but it is a little confusing, I will let them know. I think the most difficult part of writing our essays in 328 is that we are supppose to write to an audience that has no idea of th eclass or anything we are doing. It is easier to write to an audience that has some background on what you are doing. Many times we assume that since we understand what we are writing, our audience will too.
As far as things not working in peer review, the quality of the comments given. I want and embrace comments, and I mean comments like what isn't working and what should be fixed or if something is wordy or confusing to understand. But it seems that many don't put the extra effort in. I'm sure we all want to believe that we wrote A papers without any editing, but we probably didn't. And giving comments back are our last chance between our own editing and grading.
The one thing that I have learned in peer review over the course of the semester is that not everyone wants or give honest comments or editing. I think that people don't want to hurt other people's feelings so they say it was great or good point even if it really wasn't or they really didn't read it. I remember one time in class we discussed a similar situation where someone felt like their comments were mean or rude. So basically I learned that honesty is the best to give true comments but you should say something positive too so the person dosn't feel like they are being dumped on.
I also found (well someone else found it and showed me) a really really cool tool on google docs. If you go under word count you can check the level of your writing on different scales. If you write for what grade audience, so on and so on. Very neat!

Looking Back at Past Readings

Throughout the semester we have read several different articles, books, ect. that have discussed the realtionship of words, speech, images and movies. Going back to one of the first, by Ong, compares to what we are exploring now. That is, that writing is a technonlgy. It came after speech and is learned. I'm not sure which way Ong would go with the movie making process. One one hand we are using technonlgy much furhter advanced than writing, but we took out a lot of writing and constructed our video on mainly speech. So a comtemporary Ong may think it's wonderful to use the video to express a grammar rule or function vocally, but a more archaic Ong may still be aganist the technonlgy of it all. Baron may shed a slightly different light on it because we didn't actually so any typing. We wrote out all the words or sentences that we used in the video. So we really only used the computer for music and film. I think that McCloud would have the most to say about the film because he wrote about th erealtionship between images and words. The biggest example of this is when we made th eword "wordy" with lincoln logs and then shoved them off the table. It gave a word, a visual and gave a meaning about being wordy to the author. After thinking about all this in regards to my essay, I find it very interesting the twists and turns that this class has taken in regards to writing. It started with articles that preferred speech, which was used in the video, over the written word (also in the video) to learning about the grammar rules and styles of this written form (topic of movie) to the use of visuals and words (helpful for making a movie). It seems like the class moved with the evolution of writing or ways to deliver a message. speech-writing-how to write-pictures-movie. wow, good one krause!

Looking Back at Past Readings

movie making and writing

So far in this movie making process I have seen many similarities between writing and making the movie. The first of which, is brainstorming. Before I begin an essay I always brainstorm possible ideas, make lists and see how much information I have on the subject and what connections I can make. This was exactly what happened when my group was deciding on an idea for our movie. We went through several different topics before choosing and we elimated topics based on a lack of ideas we had to actually make the movie. Like examples to show and how easy the point was to get across. Once we had the idea it was obvious that the creativity within the group took over. This is also true of writing. When writing academically there is always certain information htat must be included and only one form that is suitable. We were fortunate to have the option to instill our creativity and humor into the movie, but I think that this idea compares to the voice the writer tries to create when writing. Even if you are writing a formal piece you still want your voice to be heard. It was also very similar to writing since we had an introduction, body and conclusion. There is form and procedure to a film just like an essay. I very much agree with Anderson and his idea of intergrating low bridge technologies into the classroom, although I really didn't understand the concept of "technical determinism" to see the danger in too much exposure. I agree that "technonogies can facilitate a sense of creativity that can lead to motivation (44)." Mainly because I am very excited to see the completion on the movie and have the chance to write about it. It really did involve crteativity and got me to think about the possibilities of "writing" outside of an essay. I also agree that the computer is more engaging than a piece of paper to write on, but I don't think that it should be taught as being more beneficial as students. Technonlgy should be the stimilus to the writing, just like how our movie making stirred the thoughts in our heads and now we need to collect them and put them on paper.

Peer Review #3

After reviewing what others thought about peer reviw it seems that most of the students had the same opinion as myself. Mainly that the best function of wiki is that you are able to see an entires class' essays on one page. But it was difficult to know who was in which class. It was alo helpful to read other student's essays to get ideas for your own paper. You get to see what others are doing and what they came up with. It seems that many have complained about the kind of feedback they got. Mostly, I think that students want more comments about what ideas were or were not working. I think that people mostly give editing comments. Like if a comma is necessary or spelling is correct. It was also more difficult to edit with wiki. I think that studenst like being able to strike out certain areas and aadd notes and highlight. After using both systems, it seems clear that google docs is preferred. My opinion hasn't really changed and Ithink that many of the students would agree.

McCloud part 2

While reviewing some of my classmates blog posts about the first post of McCloud I found one that was missing a big point in McCloud's book. This blog was posted by David Slaga and the comic he chose to analyze can be found at http://www.comics.com/comics/hedge/archive/hedge-20081027.html.
The comic is shown in 3 panels and is drawn in black and white. It's very "cartoony" and appears to come to have come right out of a sketchpad. The element that David fails to mention is McCloud's idea of space and time. In all 3 panels there are 2 or more characters speaking within the same panel. McCloud talks about this in chapter 4 of Understanding Comics by showing a panel with several different characters speaking right after each other in a row. McCloud does not consider this a "single moment" in time, like everyone is speaking at once. Rather we are walking through the panel meeting each character one after the other. McCloud describes this by saying that "each figure is arranged from left to right in the sequence we will read them, each occupying a distinct time slot" (97).